once saved always saved?

[mistertwisty]

I am asking because I am not able to find defining scripture that goes either way on this. Most of the verses I find have the word "if" in them. On my wed night bible study we have been going through John 15:6, and digging into it's meaning.

John 15:6 (New King James Version)

6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

I would like to hear from both sides of the discussion we can or cannot loose our salvation. I will try to play devils advocate from both points of view. I am hoping that someone has the answers I am looking for. I am honestly seeking the truth, so please don't think I am trying to put a stumbling block in front of anyone, just feeling convicted to find out about this.


Hope this makes sense to someone other than me

[Mike]

I am asking because I am not able to find defining scripture that goes either way on this. Most of the verses I find have the word "if" in them. On my wed night bible study we have been going through John 15:6, and digging into it's meaning.

John 15:6 (New King James Version)

6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

I would like to hear from both sides of the discussion we can or cannot loose our salvation. I will try to play devils advocate from both points of view. I am hoping that someone has the answers I am looking for. I am honestly seeking the truth, so please don't think I am trying to put a stumbling block in front of anyone, just feeling convicted to find out about this.


Hope this makes sense to someone other than me
Once saved always saved is a clear cut fact. It is undeniable. Those who believe otherwise are mistaken.

There are many verses when taken out of the immediate context and/or when taken out of the larger context would seem to indicate that one can lose their salvation. However that is not possible and all of those verse when taken in context can be understood.

The verse that you quote is one of the more difficult ones.

You were rather vague about what it is that you are looking for. Responding to these type of questions properly can be very time consuming. And the fact is that most people who start these threads already have their mind made up with regards to the doctrine and responding to them in detail winds up being a waste of time.

So could you be more specific about where you stand on the doctrine and what it is that you are looking for?

-

[mistertwisty]

where I stand is basically teetering between the two views. I find good arguments for both cases. I think the word "if" as I stated is the one that gives me the most trouble. Like I said before, this is a sincere attemp to figure this out, and I promise I am not just "looking for an argument". I will however put anyone through the paces on the issue, that's because I want to be real sure that scripture backs it up. I don't intend for this to degenerate into a predestination thread, but somehow freewill has to be taken into consideration.

You state that it is an undeniable fact, what scripture do you use to back that view? (in context of course)

Yes I know it is a difficult verse, in fact that is exactly the reason our pastor chose it. I have spent 6 weeks looking at context and relative scripture, and I am still not able to make up my mind on what this says.

[Mike]

where I stand is basically teetering between the two views. I find good arguments for both cases. I think the word "if" as I stated is the one that gives me the most trouble. Like I said before, this is a sincere attemp to figure this out, and I promise I am not just "looking for an argument". I will however put anyone through the paces on the issue, that's because I want to be real sure that scripture backs it up. I don't intend for this to degenerate into a predestination thread, but somehow freewill has to be taken into consideration.

You state that it is an undeniable fact, what scripture do you use to back that view? (in context of course)

Yes I know it is a difficult verse, in fact that is exactly the reason our pastor chose it. I have spent 6 weeks looking at context and relative scripture, and I am still not able to make up my mind on what this says.
Ok sorry if my post came accross a little bit rude.

On the John 15 verse you mentioned, those are talking about fruit bearing. He wants us to bear much fruit, and we will do that if we abide in Him. But if we don't do that the result is good for nothing except to be burned.

Now compare that 1 Cor. 3:13-15

[13] Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
[14] If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
[15] If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

If we abide in Him we bear much fruit and recieve a reward. If we don't abide in Him we will be serving our flesh and producing works that are good for nothing and will be burned.

Eternal security is one of the most rock solid doctrines in the Bible. We can show verse after verse to clearly show that it is solid and true. Here is my favorite.

John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever...

It is like this...

I have a gallon of gas that I am will to give you and I tell you that this is special gas. If you put this gallon in your tank, your car will run forever.

Now if you take the gallon and put it in your car then either your car runs forever or else I am a liar.

It is the same with John 6:51. That is some special bread. If you eat of it you will live forever. Or else God is a liar and you can chuck you Bible in the trash.

-

[mistertwisty]

No offense taken, quite the opposite. I am glad you are willing to have this discussion.

Interesting verses you quoted, I will take the time to read through I Corrinthians with this thought in mind. (sadly I am at work and must wait until later to do so)

So in the John verse, you are suggesting that the "branches" that do not abide are the "works" that are spoken of in Corrinthians. Why then does Jesus say just 1 verse before:

5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.

surely He is not talking to the works.

6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

there is the "if" I am talking about. It seems to be conditional.

[Wildcat81]

I am asking because I am not able to find defining scripture that goes either way on this.

It seems to me that the problem is not so much Scripture that goes either way, as some passages that seem to go one way, and other passages that seem to go the other.

Being, as I am, a Wesleyan by education (my MA is from a theologically Wesleyan seminary), I'm pretty firmly of the camp that "You're not eternally secure until you're secure in eternity." I think that although there are several passages which seem to lend support to Perseverance (which is easier to type than "Once Saved Always Saved"), the preponderance of evidence seems to come down on the side of salvation being something that we take up (by God-given freedom), and can, if we choose, lay aside.

The problem with this issue is, as I said, that there are various passages that tend to support both sides, making it very easy for both sides to prooftext their way through a debate. And of course, prooftexting is a whole lot easier than doing the real, hard work of exegesis, so most people tend to prefer going that route.

[Wildcat81]

Just to play devil's advocate (as it were):

Now if you take the gallon and put it in your car then either your car runs forever or else I am a liar.

Or, the car runs until you drain the gas tank and take out the spark plugs.

[mistertwisty]

It seems to me that the problem is not so much Scripture that goes either way, as some passages that seem to go one way, and other passages that seem to go the other.

Being, as I am, a Wesleyan by education (my MA is from a theologically Wesleyan seminary), I'm pretty firmly of the camp that "You're not eternally secure until you're secure in eternity." I think that although there are several passages which seem to lend support to Perseverance (which is easier to type than "Once Saved Always Saved"), the preponderance of evidence seems to come down on the side of salvation being something that we take up (by God-given freedom), and can, if we choose, lay aside.

The problem with this issue is, as I said, that there are various passages that tend to support both sides, making it very easy for both sides to prooftext their way through a debate. And of course, prooftexting is a whole lot easier than doing the real, hard work of exegesis, so most people tend to prefer going that route.

Perhaps that is a better way to phrase it. So from your stance, what are relavent passages?

The hard work of exegesis has done more to confuse me at this point, so I am still sstuddying to show myself approved.

[Tron4JC]

Lutheran stance on this issue:

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuItem_itemID=2476&cuTopic_topicID=47

Q: Would it be correct to say that Lutherans teach Perseverance of the Elect, but not Perseverance of the Saints? In other words, a person may have faith at one point in his life but then act in such a way, resisting the grace of God and indulging in sin, that he weakens and ultimately loses that faith. But a person who is among the elect from the foundations of the world, this group obviously known only by God, will ultimately persevere in his faith. Is this accurate?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A: While we do not use the phrase all that regularly, perhaps to avoid confusion with the "perseverance of the saints" dogma among Calvinists, we rightly hold to the teaching on the perseverance of the elect. You are correct and have stated the concept quite well. Passages like Matthew 24: 22, 24 serve as the basis of this teaching, as does the very definition of the term elect or chosen, as used in Ephesians 1 and elsewhere.



http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=10&cuItem_itemID=15094

Q: Brothers: After asking my question, I did some searches for the answers that you provided before. Total Depravity – Lutheran’s and Calvinists agree. Unconditional Election - Lutheran’s and Calvinists agree. Limited Atonement – Calvinists believe that Jesus Christ died generally and specifically for the Elect only. Lutherans believe that Jesus Christ died generally for all and specifically to the elect. Irresistible grace – Calvinists believe that there is a “hidden call” to the elect only through the Holy Spirit that is not resistible, to the non-elect the call is resistible. Lutherans believe that the call in general is resistible. Perseverance of the Saints: Both Lutherans and Calvinists believe that only the elect that have been predestined to life will have eternal life. Calvinists saying “You must believe to the end to be saved, but the elect will believe to the end”. Is this a correct summary of the Lutheran position ? I know that there are many other differences but this is a start.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A: Yes this this basically correct. A few of the points could have a little more comment.

"Total Depravity – Lutherans and Calvinists agree." Yes this is correct. Both agree on the devastating nature of the fall and that man by nature has no power to aid in his conversions.

"Unconditional Election - Lutheran’s and Calvinists agree." Yes. both agree that election to salvation is by grace. In Lutheranism the German term for election is Gnadenwahl, election by grace--there is no other kind.

"Limited Atonement – Calvinists believe that Jesus Christ died generally and specifically for the Elect only. Lutherans believe that Jesus Christ died generally for all and specifically to the elect. " We would not put the second sentence quite this way. Christ's death was sufficient for all and offered for all. It was sufficient for all. God the Father accepted it for all. It is valid for all, but only those who apply that payment to themselves by faith will benefit from it. Those who do not have faith forfeit the blessing that was won for them. Though Christ truly gained it for them, they squander the blessing by unbelief. The fault for this rests with them, not with God.

"Irresistible grace – Calvinists believe that there is a “hidden call” to the elect only through the Holy Spirit that is not resistible, to the non-elect the call is resistible. Lutherans believe that the call in general is resistible." We cannot separate the Holy Spirit from the gospel. He works through the gospel, not merely along side of it. Those who reject the gospel are also resisting and rejecting the Holy Spirit as Scripture plainly says. The Spirit is not offered only to the elect.

""Perseverance of the Saints: Both Lutherans and Calvinists believe that only the elect that have been predestined to life will have eternal life. Calvinists saying “You must believe to the end to be saved, but the elect will believe to the end”. "My question is what is your position on eternal security. It would seem to me that if salvation was in the left hand kingdom, all of grace, perserverance would also be of grace, otherwise you would be mixing Law and Gospel." We usually prefer to use the word "preservation" rather than "perseverance" because it more clearly states that we are preserved by God's gracious actions, not by persevering through our efforts. The Holy Spirit preserves us through the gospel.

[funmudder]

This is where I get hung up:

{KJV}Mar 3:28 (Jesus speaking to the pharisees) Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
Mar 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

{NIV}Mar 3:28 I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them.
Mar 3:29 But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin.”

Because our Lord was speaking to the men that were educated in the scriptures, to people that should know better than to call good evil, that honestly makes me believe you can throw your salvation away.
By already knowing the truth, and then willfully turning your back on it, then you most certainly are in danger of losing your salvation. It's not a salvation by works thing, its an obediance thing.

I think of a relative of mine. When younger he was a Bible thumpin' scripture loving young man.
Somewhere along the lines he 'got educated' and now regularly, loudly, denies Christ or the existance of any God.
Do I want to believe "Once Saved Always Saved?" of course I do! Especially for his sake. My inner voice tells me its just not so.
The Lord gave us the free will to choose Him, and I believe we have the free will to reject that salvation too. :(

I could be wrong, but then, I will just keep abiding in Him and not risk being a branch that was once alive but then whithered away to be gathered and burned :thumbup